hi all,

just wanted to put this out there...

I'm a neuroscientist, with a flair for portrait photography. My work (which is a non-profit organisation) has asked me to provide them with people and object photography for their upcoming annual report it will be about 100-150 portraits and 50-100 photos of objects and photoshopped images of scientific data.

I live in Australia, my work is excellent but not high professional. Im an expert in photoshop.

What should I charge?

thanks for any advice

Alan

Try the Pro Digital Corner...

If it is a non profit and a good cause just donate your time. Chagre only materials if any used.

Non profit CEO, deputy director, and other staff are often getting paid, why shouldn't a photographer?

My Simple Suggestion:

Quote what you think YOU are worth.

Their response to that quote should tell you something.

mat.bastian wrote:
Non profit CEO, deputy director, and other staff are often getting paid, why shouldn't a photographer?

For real.

I do a bit of Non Profit here in DC and they get 10-15% discount depending.

thanks all,

I forgot to mention that:

last year I provided a few hundred great photos that they loved for free. They referenced my name in their annual report but that was it. Although I work there, they dont pay my salary or for my research.

last year and this year they also published my photos in editorials and articles in the mainstream news papers about 5 times, but failed to inform me before hand and refused to put my name and the copyright on the photos saying that it made it "complicated". This made me very angry.

They also published these photos without consent of the models and 2 of these were quite angry to have their images used without consent and refused to pose for me this year.

This year we are obtaining written release documents from each model and I have offered to do the whole annual report for 50% less than the commercial quote (about AU$3k). They just want the photos for free but asked me to quote them to just shoot the photos.

So I have to come up with a quote... AU$1000-2000? for 250 photos. I know a lot of amateurs with SLRS shooting on P are "cheapening" this area of work...so Im treading carefully.

thanks again

Given your position with them AND your previous experience AND your past "anger"at the way they used your photos (or you)....

I would pass on this opportunity and let them pay a pro.

Steady Hand wrote:
Given your position with them AND your previous experience AND your past "anger"at the way they used your photos (or you)....

I would pass on this opportunity and let them pay a pro.

+1 Given your past experience, getting involved with this again seems like a recipe for trouble. Nothing worse than being angry with the people you work for ...

Why are you even considering it with how they treated you in the past?

Maybe neuroscience pays less than I am presuming.

well, I've thought of that. My boss and work buddies are independent of this job, so thats good. Thats why Im going to charge them, if they dont like it, they can hire a pro for 5x the amount with prob less photos. Im pretty sure I'll get the job, I just need a figure to quote.

Its in my best interest to do this job as a) I get to build up my portfolio b) hope to make some cash and buy a new lens (maybe) c) I get some experience that maybe I can put to good use, in neuroscience it is tough to get funding and Im worried about an income.

thanks again

You should be able to figure this out - it isn't rocket science....it's neuroscience.

Observation - maybe the reason they are non-profit is that they produce an annual report with 150-250 pictures in it!! Does Exxon have that many in their annual report?

OK - so there are no shareholders to impress with the annual report. Why then would they produce such a lavish book (egos aside)? The only explanation is that it is a major source of grants and donations... This is how they get their income, and the better the report the more the income.

They go cheap on the photos, they starve. They pay a pro and they are even more non-profit. They have proven that your photos are an acceptable alternative to them. So now not only are you helping them by neuroing some science for them, but you are going to throw logs on the fundraising fire at a cost below what your time is worth?

What are you, trying for a combo Noble prize in neuroscience and advertising?

Hey - all this humor is not meant to be criticism - just sometimes you humanity-saving superheroes are definitely not from the planet BUSINESSMAN.

But seriously - tough call. But ultimately your call. Start high and drop your pricing if they balk and you really want to do it.

No matter what though - tell them your photography is not only a hobby but a fall back business in the event there is a worldwide glut of either neuros or science, and that the photo credit is a deal breaker.

If they can't take the space to caption your photos with your name then slap them upside the synapse and walk away.

Maybe they are worried that a talented neuroscientist AND photographer could easily get a PAID gig somewhere?

Good luck!

thanks for an insightful and funny reply dwerther,

you hit the nail on the head in many repsects.

they do get a lot of funding from schmoozing the people who donate by giving them a warm and fuzzy via photos of hot chicks doing CSI like science. we have lots of good looking young ladies in my lab the "execs" have asked for images of them to be included. it makes me sick that the nerdy looking real minds behind the game are often ignored to have a ditzy blonde looking through a glass slide into infinity...its sux but sex sells even in neuroscience.

even if my experiments work (which they hardly ever do) and I do find a cure for Alzheimer's, my boss gets all the cred and my funder's get all the IP...so they should...so this is certainly a fall back for me, esp in such economic downturn and with extreme competition.

Im going to instist they credit my work and copyright the photos, but they claim that in editorials this is not the done thing.

thanks again, if you want, I'll upload a few warm and fuzzy shots...

cheer

Al

I don't know how copyright works in Australia. Most of the ARs that I have done will have list credits for the designer, printer, writer and photographer. I wouldn't expect anybody to put the same photocredit on 250 images. How many pages is this thing, I have never heard of or seen an Annual Report with that many pix.

Do you have any idea how many days it'll take to shoot all the portraits and product shots?

ok, so they dont use all of the ~200 photos on the annual report, they also put out a lot of pamphlets and do news things which they put out for various events. they want to use the photos for their website too.

Its all up about 5-6 days of shooting, 3-4 hours per day. Then there is PP, I dont mid the time, i get lots of 1-2 hour incubations in my job so i can duck out of the lab to shoot...and I love the photography and the photoshopping. I get nervous/anxious, re: performance and making sure my equipment is good to go but most of the staff know me and can relax.

=D

I say quote them the 3k and then put in a 10-15% discount

250 commercial headshots for $3K? They go for about $700-$1K each here. Even with a volume discount, that's a $10-$15K job. At least, it was before Madoff ruined the next 10 years budgets for every non-profit here in NY.